. . A " 1 r"''' 'JiV'" 'i ';""' <"' '" " ''' ' ■ ' 




PsiuUiwMKu'liiKSnS ' 



V 



■ ^ 



m 






'^o^ 









J' 



C, sP 






^^-n^ 






..•^' 









i 






-v. 






\/' 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 



Mr, Buthr, of Massachusetts, and Mr. BingJtam, of Ohio, on the 
Mill ion Apiiropriation Bill of the Senate for the relief of the 
Southern Rebels ; and the amendment of Mr. Bntler that a 
like sum he appropriated to the relief of the Widows and Or- 
phans of our Soldiers starved in rebel prisons ; or that the rich 
rebels shouldj he taxed to feed' their own poor. 



The House beiag in Committee of the 
Vv l;.oU>, njjou tho amen(iment proposed by 
Mr. EiKoifAM, in fiubstance that t'ae Com- 
missions ot'tiie Fruedmer/s Bureau should 
eup^>urf tli I-. TKK.-V of tUo Sotitli Ui the ^xtewt 
ui" ixW ii»., ^\.yu^jh :,i his ha :"-.V- — 

MR. BUTLER, of Massachusetts, said,- 
Mr. Chairman, in the first place I would 
like to inquire to what time debate is limi- 
ted ? 

TJie CHAIRMAN. Five minutes for and 
five minutes against each amendment. The 
pending amendment is that which has been 
offered and advocated by the gentleman from 
Ohio, [Mr. Bingham.] ^he Chair under- 
stands tlie gentleman from Massachusetts to 
rise to o})pose the amendment. 
^ Mr. BUTLER. I propose, Mr. Chairman, 
t to present a few suggestions for the purpose 
^ of showing why the amendment ofiered by 
• the gentleman from Ohio should not be 
adopted ; and I think that, in view of the 
fact that the gentleman has spoken three 
times on this question, I shall ask him to 
interpose his good offices and his great 
influence with the House to secure for me i 
the privilege of speaking somewhat longer ■ 
than five minutes. I will promise not to 
consume very much time. | 

In the first place, let us see what the '\ 
Freedmen's Bureau has done. I .speak from ; 
official reports. Daring the year ending \ 
November 1, 18G6, by order of the President i 
of the United States, two hundred and : 
eighty- seven thousand one hundred and ; 
twenty-two acres of land and two thousand ; 
six hundred and five pieces of town prop- j 
erty, amounting altogether to more than ten I 
million dollars, were taken from the freed- \ 
men, to whose benefit they had been appro- ' 
priated by act of Congress, and returned ■ 
to the white men of the South who had 
been engaged in the rebellion. We are now I 



! asked to aid st'll further the white men at 
i the expense of the freedmen. 

What else has been done ? During the 
nfteen monclis closing witii Augn?;t, 1866, 
i as appears by the report of General Howard:, 
; four ruilliou T.ve liundred aud .^eTcti thoU- 
; sand i;iac liu;iiired and twt-uty-twf^ rations 
i were distributed to refugees in the South, 
i in addition to the rations furnished to freed- 
: men. General Howard farther states ; 

" Tlie number of rations issued to the colored people 
; has constantly decreased. They have found labor, 
: for ivliich they have received support, and in some 
i cases good wages. Although many complaints are 
: made of the amount of rations issued to the freedmen 
; the fact of the constant deci-ease of their demands is 
i very creditable. The issue to whites increased until 
i June 30, 5.866, When the issue to freedmen and refu- 
j gees were about equal thoughout the South." 

I Again, sir, at the request of the Governor 
\ of Alabama, rations to the amount of $40, 
I 000 per month for the period of three montha 
! were issued in the State of Alabama, princi- 
pally for the relief of the white people. 
Yet, notwithstanding all this expenditure, 
we are asked to encroach still further upon 
the provisions made for the freedmen, for 
the sake of aiding whom ? Not merely the 
women and the children, not merely the 
sick and the disabled, but the ablebodied 
rebel, who, lounging at the corner grocery, 
refuses to work, while the " mudsills" of 
the North are obliged to work in order that 
they may pay taxes for the support of the 
Government. Shall the "mudsills" of the 
North be taxed to support in lazy, whiskey- 
drinking idleness, the self-styled "aristoc- 
racy " of the South ? 

And we are told that, after we have for 
such a purpose as this diverted a million 
or two millions of the money appropriated 
for the benefit of the freedmen, we are to 
bring in a deficiency bill to supply the 
amount thus withdrawn from the legitimates 
purposes of the Freedmen's B^^pj^t^. j^q^, 



2 



my part I am opposed to sueli legislation, 
and I desire to enter my protest against it 
in every form, even tliongh the legislative 
experience — 1 was about to say "ctiieanery" 
— of my friend from Ohio restricts me to 
five minutes in which to enter my protest 
against what lie has advocated in his speech 
of an hour. * 

It is said, sir, that the people of the South 
are starving, and I accept that st:<tement as 
fact. My Iriend from Vermont, [Mr. WooD- 
beidge] told us that this was the work of 
the Lord, quoting the i:'af sage, " Vengeance 
is mine : I will repay, saith the Lord." Be 
it so. It would seem as if an avenging 
Providence had sent this starvation esjje- 
cially upon those parts of the country where 
the Union prisoners were starved : in the 
vicinity of Richmond and Salisbury, and 
Andersonville and Millen, and other places 
in the South where our soldiers underwent 
so much suffering. The men and women 
who stood by and viewed without compas- 
sion the miseries endured by otir noble sol- 
diers will, if they experience a little star- 
vation themselves, be able to realize what 
was sufl'ered in Southern prisons by those 
who fought our battles. 

[Here the hammer fell.] 

Here a vaiied debate ensued between 
many gentlemen, during wliich Mr. Wood- 
BKiDGE commented on the resolutions of the 
Grand Army of the Republic approving the 
course of Messrs. Logan, of Illinois, Covode, 
of Pennsylvania, and Butlek, in opposing 
this appropriation, which had been elo- 
quently replied to by General Logan, when 
Mr. BUTLEPw said: I renew the amend- 
ment to the amendment, because I under- 
stand I can get the opportunity to speak 
now only by moving some amendment which 
I do not mean. That is a new revelation to 
me in my short experience in legislative 
life. 

I desire to reply to some of the observa- 
tions that fell from the gentleman from 
Vermont, [Mr. WooDDranoE, ] as well as to 
call the aiteiitiou of the House to the course 
pursued by tlie gentUman from Ohio, Mr. 
[Bingham.] 

Tlie gentleman from Vermont was kind 
enough the other day to te^ll the House that 
I was no statesman. Now, I agree to that ; 
and I am sorry such is the fact. I just es- 
caped being a statesman, I suppose, by not 
being elected to the Thirty-Ninth Congress. 
[Laughter.] 

Mr. WOODBRIDGE. I simply desire to 
state to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. ■ Butlek] that I said no such thing, 
made no such charge,, and the gentleman 
knows it. 

Mr. BUTLER. Then he means to say that 
} am a statesman, [laughter,] and I am very 
jfttich obliged to him. Now, a word more 



in regard to the action of the soldiers of the 
Grand Army of the Republic. I received 
from them, unsolicited and unasked, a res- 
olution approving my course- And so long 
as I have the approval of the soldiers of the 
Arn.y, I can very well do without tlie ap- 
proval of those who were engaged in wear- 
ing out the soft cushions of the seats in 
this House during the entire war ; I can 
survive the one if I have the other. 

Now, I am not here to say anything that 
may be considered at all personal in its? 
character. But I desire to ask the attention 
of the House to the fairness of the course of 
the j;,entleman from Ohio, [Mr. Bingham.] 

Mr. BINGHAM. I rise to a question of 
order. The g-ntlemanhas no right to raise 

a q'aestion of fairness upon vay conduct kar© 

at this time of day. 

Mr. BUTLER. What does'the gentleman 
say? 

Mr. BINGHAM. I raise the point of 
order that the gentleman has no right to 
reflect upon my conduct here by raising the 
question of fairness. 

Mr. BUTL!.;R. Well, unfairness, then ; I 
will admit that I was mistaken in calling it 
a question of fairness. [Laughter.] 

Mr. BINGHAM. I call the gentleman to 
order. 

Mr. BUTLER. I will withdraw the auos- 
tion of fjiii ness ; I admit that none can be 
raised. Will that do ? [Laughter.] 

Now, in regard to this joint resolution, I 
have one further consideration to present. 
I ask members here if they are ready to 
vote an appropriation of $1,000,000 in any 
form before they decide the question which 
is involved in the amendment proposed by 
the gentleman from Ohio, in front of me, 
[Mr. ScHRNCK?] That amendment provides 
that district commanders mny relieve the 
distressed people of their districts by dis- 
tributing aid to tliem tjom the stores of the 
Army, and then tax the rich rebels to pay 
for those stores. 

Gentlemen talk about confiscation, and 
say that tliis is unconstitirtional. Now, it 
would seem that there is nothing constitu- 
tional except to put the hand into the 
Treasury of the United States. As I have 
said already, I ask no confiscation of any 
rebel property ; hut I ask that the rich of 
the community shall support the poor and 
suffering. 

[Debate followed, in which Mr. Bingham 
modified his amendment.] 

Mr. BUTLER. I am opposed to the 
amendment of the gentleman from Ohio, 
[Mr. BiXGHAM,] and in order to demonstrate 
my position, I will ask the Clerk to read as 
a part of my remarks the plan of the Presi- 
dent of the United States. 
The Clerk read as follows : 

Extract from Diary of JleheUion Record, volume six, 
page 2.5, December 15, 1862. 
" fiovernor Johnson, of Tennessee, this day issued 
an order assessing certain individuals in the city of 



Xasliville, in various amounts to be paid in five 
monthly instalments, in behalf of the many helpless 
widows, wives, and children in the city of Nashville 
who have been reduced to poverty and wietcliedness 
in consequence of their husband-!, sons, and fathers 
havini^ been f'rced into the armies of this unholy and 
nefarious rebellion." 
Extract from JppUton's American Encyclopedia^ 

volume , page 7G9. 

" About the same time [latter part of 1862] Gov- 
ernor Johnson published 9,;i order assessing tlie 
wealthy secessionists of Nashville and tlie vicinity 
to tlie amount of SGO,000 for the eui^jjort of the poor 
during the winter." 

Mr. SCUENCK. That is the plau embra- 
ced ill my substitute. 

Mr. BLJTLER. Now, I ask how my friend 
from 0> io, [Mr. Bingham,] who has got 
over on the otiier side not only in body, but 
in spirit, [laughter, J can afford to go against 
the policy of tlie President, to which I call 
his attention ? There it is ; that is the 
example set us by that. " great and good 
man" when he had the power and the 
inclination. He taxed the rich secessionist 
in order to feed the wives and children of 
the i)Oor men who had been forced into this 
"nefarious rebellion." Now, I want to do 
the same thing : nothing more and nothing 
less. 

Now, before I sit down, I want to make 
another suggestion to our friends on the 
other side, because I know what weighs on 
tliwir minds. I would ask them how they 
can vot<3 for the arat^udment of tlie gentle- 
man from Ohio, [Mr. HixGUAM,] recognizing, 
as it does, that abomination of abomina- 
tions, the "N(jgro Bureau," which they 
have always opposed ? 
[Ileie the hammer fell.] 
Mr. BINGHAM. I move to amend by 
striking out the last word. 

I desire to say, Mr. Chairman, that it does 
not become a gentleman who recorded his 
vote fifty times for Jefferson Davis, the arch- 
traitor in this rebellion, as his candidate 
for President of the United States, to under- 
take to damage this cause by attempting to 
cast an imputation either upon my integrity 
or my honor. I repel with scorn and con- 
tempt any utterance of that sort from any 
man, whether he be the hero of Fort Fisher 
not taken or of Fort Fisher taken. [Laugh- 
ter.] I stand here also in the -name of the 
American people to repel with scorn the 
attempt to levy charity by confiscation, in 
violation of the Constitution of my country. 
That, sir, is ' the proposition which the 
gentleman dares to ofl'er in an American 
Congress in the sacred name of charity. 
[Here the hammer fell.] 

Mr. BUTLER. Mr. Chairman 

The CHAIRMAN. All debate by order 
of the House is exhausted. 

Mr. BUTLER. I understand the Chair to 
state a while ago that all deb;;tes would 
clo.>e at fiiteen minutes past three o'clock. 

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair stated that 
the hour to which debate had been limited 
would expire at eighteen minutes after three 
o'clock. 1 



Mr. BUTLER. So that the gentleman 
from Ohio had just enough time to make a 
personal attack upon me. 

The CH AIRMAN. No debate is in order. 

Mr. BUTLER. I ask the privilege of re- 
plying to the gentleman from Ohio. 

The CilAIPiMAN. The gentleman can 
ask the privilege of the House, but not of 
the committee. 

Mr. BUTLER. I ask it of the committee. 

The CHAIRMAN. The committee is not 
competent to grant the privilege. 

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I hope that by unani- 
mous consent the committee will grant the 
gentleman the privilege. This is a subject 
which I should be glad to have ventilated. - 

The CHAIRMAN. The committee must 
rise for that purpose. The Chairoian is act- 
ing tinder the express order of the House, 
that all debate be limited to one hour. 

Mr FARNSWORTH. I move that the 
committee rise. 

On the motion there were — aves 45 noes 
58. 

Mr. STEVENS, of Pennsylvania. I call 
for tellers. 

Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. Fakns- 
woRTH and Bixgham were appointed. 

The committee divided ; and the tellers 
reported — ayes 67, noes f^3. 

So the motion was agreed to. 

The committee accordingly rose ; and the 
Speaker having resttmed the chair, Mr. 
Blaine reported that the Committee of -the 
Whole on the state of the Union having, 
according to order, had, the Union generally 
under consideration, and particularly Senate 
joint resolution No. 16, for the relief of the 
destitute in the southern and southwestern 
States, had come to no resolution thereon. 

RELIEF OF DESTITUTE IN THE SOUTH — AGAIN. 

Mr. FARNSWORTH. I propose to move 
to reconsider the vote restricting debate in 
Committee of the Whole on this bill ; but 
before making that motion I will yield to 
the gentleman from Massachusetts, [ Mr. 
Butler,] who desires an opportunity to 
reply to the gentleman from Ohio. 

The SPEAKER. It will require unani- 
mous consent for the gentleman from Mas- 
sachusetts to make his remarks at this time, 
as the bill i.s not before the House, but in 
Committee of the Whole. If thegenUeman 
will ir^dicate how much time he desires, the 
Chair will ask unanimous consent for him 
to proceed now. 

Mr. BUTLER. Ten minutes. 

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I hope the House will 
grant unanimous consent, and not permit 
the gentleman from Massachutetts to be 
"bottled up" in this manner. [Laughter.] 

The SPEAKER. If no gentleman objects, 
the Chair will understand that the gentle- 
man from Massachusetts has unanimous 
consent to speak for ten minutes. 

There was no objection. 



.,.i. .- X I aker, I am nnder 
ligations to the House for its kind- 
lU my behalf ; and I will endeavor to 
..void trespassing unduly upon its time. 

I have never concealed, Mr. Speaker, the 
fac:t which is now so offensively put forward, 
that before the war I, in the convention of 
my party, voted iifty-seven times for Jeffer- 
son Davis for President. I thought him the 
representative man of the South, and I 
• hoped by his nomination to prevent threat- 
ened disunion. I was foiled, and disunion 
came. The difference between me and the 
honorable gentleman from Ohio is this : 
while Jefferson Davis was in the Union, a 
Senator of the United States, and claiming 
to be a friend of the Union, I supported him ; 
but he now supports him when he is a trait- 
or. [Laughter.] I left him as soon as he 
left the Union. [Renewed laughter.] I 
saw the error of my ways aud repented ; but 
I did not expect that a blow would be made 
against me from that direction, from the 
side of the House that supported him then 
and has supported him ever since, aud is 
still supporting him aud his friends. 

I did not meau to impugn the honor of 
the gentleman from Ohio or his integrity. 
I only said that I thought he was on the 
other side of the Hoixse. 

Mr. BINGHAM. Will the gentleman par- 
don me If the gentleman had qualified his 



remark by saying that he only thought so, 
I would not have said a word in reply. The 
gentleman did not qualify his words by any 
such expression. 

Mr. BUTLER. The words I used, if I am 
not mistaken, were these : that he was in 
spirit, as he was in bo<iy, on the other side 
of the House. I thought so then, I think 
so now ; I said so then. I say so now, [laugh- 
ter, ] and I cannot take it back. 

The gentleman has the bad taste to attack 
me for the reason that I could not do any 
more injury to the enemies of my country. 
I agree to that. I did all I could — the best 
I could. Other men of more ability could 
do more ; and no man is more ready to give 
them the highest plaudits for valor and dis- 
cretion and conduct than I am. And 
because I coUld not do more I feel exceed- 
ingly chagrined ; but if during the war the 
gentleman irom Ohio did as much as I did 
in that direction, I shall be glad to recognize 
that much done. But the only victim of 
the gentleman's prowess that I know"of was 
an innocent woman hung upon the scaffold — 
one Mrs. Surratt. And I can sustain the 
memory of Fort Fisher if he and his prest^nt 
associates can sustain him in shedding the 
blood of a woman tried by a niilitary com- 
mission and convicted without sufficient 
evidence in my judgment. 



[Mr. Bingham made a reply to Mr. Butler, which is printed frovi the 
plionogrnphic notes of the Oj}icial Mejjorier, as written out by himself, in the 
left-hand column, VERBATIM, and contains 589 words. 

The speech, as altered and written out hy Mr. Bingham^ s oxvn hand, and 
jiuhlished in the Globe by him as the official report of his impromptu speech, 
is p)rinted in the riyJU-hand column, verbatim. IVie additions are in 
ITALICS ; the erasures of the Reporter's manuscript in orackds, [thus,'] a?id 
contain 1,047 words and 282 erasures and alterations. 

As Mr. Binghani's speech was never delivered as 'printed, Mr. Butler 
could not reply to it. Mr. Butler never saiv the manuscript of either his own 
or Binghani's speech until both were in print.'] 



MR. BINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I desire 
to make a remark or two, and I hope I will 
have the consent of the House. 

The CHAIRMAH. How long does the 
gentleman want ? 

MR. BINGHAM. Five minutes. 

There was no objection. 

MR. BINGHAM. After ten years of ser- 
vice in the Congress of the United States, the 
gentleman will look in vain for one remark 
of mine personal to mortal man upon this 
floor, save when I was gratuitously assailed 
by others. 



Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I desire 
to make a remark or two, and I hope I will 
have the consent of the House. 

The CHAIRMAN. How long does the 
gentleman want ? 

Mr. BINGiaAM. Five minutes. 

There was no objection. 

Mr. BINGHAM. [After] Although I have 
seen ten years of service in the Congress of 
the United States, the gentleman will look 
in vain for one remark of mine personal to 
[mortal] any man upon this floor, save 
when [I was] / replied to gratuitou?[ly 
assailed] assaults upon me ; and I hecj leave to 
add, scarceli) a word of mine can be found in 
the proceedings of this House which can be con- 
strued into unkindnesa toicards a fellow Member 
[by others.] 



o 



I have observed the amf^uities of debate 
sn the House, aud the amenities of personal 
conduct out of the House, in such form as, 
I trutrt, entitles me to the respect and eou- 
r-ideration ot those who know me best. Sir, 
the gentleman, when he talks about matters 
of taste, chooses to constitute himself my 
judge, and to decide touching the integrity 
of my conduct as a sworn rt^presentative of 
the people ; and when he came to make his 
reply, feeling that he had done dishonor to 
himself aud injustice tome, he undertook 
to »iualify his original charge by saying that 
he only said he thought so. Sir, if he had 
said that he only thought so, it would 
never have disturbed my equanimity, for 
that would have concerned me as much as 
what his thoughts are as to '-who killed 
Cock Robin." 



But, sir, the gentleman has shown some 
want of consideration for the rights of others 
in the remarks he has just made by the 
favor of this House. 



By whatriglit, sir, does he constitute him- 
self the judge of men who were his peers 
in the field, wlien tlie blackness aud temp- 
eat of that great conllict, which, like an 
earthquake, rocked this continent, are stain- 
ed with the blood of the innocent? 



I have observed the amenities of debafe 

, in the House, and the amenities of personal 

conduct out of the House, in such measure 

[form] as, I trust, entitles me to the respect 

and consideration of those who know me 

j best. [But,] sir, the gentleman [when he] 

J talks about matters of taste — /?! ivhic/i he .s 

^ doubtless a master — and, us a vialttr of (at'.f, 

[chooses to] constitutf[.s] himself myjudg^>, 

I aud undertakes to decide upon [toucbint-] 

' the integrity of my conduct as a sworn 

' representative of the people. I resjicctjViI tj 

I challeiu/e the gentleman'' s Jitness to be my ac- 

\ cuser, and deny his right to judge of my ojfc- 

' cial conduct. \Vhcn I had thus answered the 

gentleman's gratuitous assertion, that I had 

abandoned and betrayed my principles, [and 

wh'/n he came to make his reply,] feeling 

that he had done dishonor to himself and 

; injustice to me, he vainly seeks [undertook] 

'■ to qualify his nidc usserliun [original charge] 

I by saying that he only said he thought so. 

, Sir, if he had said that he only thouglu or 

\ feared that I had abandoned principles, be- 

1 cause I ventured to difer from him, [so,] it 

j Would never have disturbed my equanimity, 

and Wjuld have e^inted no reply from me. la- 

j deed, sir, what th.e gentleman thought about 

I '"i/ ojjicial action vonld have given me no mere 

\ [for that would liave] concern [od] than it 

, loould concern me to know what his thoughts 

\ were upon the question [me as much as what 

j his thoughts are as to] " who killed Cock 

j Robin ?" 

But, sir, the gentleman has shown the 
s['(]ome want of consideration for the rights 
of others in the remarks he has just made 
by the favor of this House, as was shown by 
hivi tol'.en this day he first assailed my official 
action, without excuse or provocation. 

By what right, sir, does [/]he gentleman 
now constitute himself the judge, not only oy 
his peer upon thisfoor, but rhe judge of men 
who were his peers in the field — men who 
stood in the day of buttle only where b:ace men 
dare st'i,id in the (laikness — [wben tho black- 
ness and temi>tst] of tL[at] e great conllict, 
[which, like an]«'/)pr« the earthquake and 
thcjire led the charge, and the victor}) tivs 
icon, not without suji'er in g and dca h, [rocked 
this continent, are stained with the blood 
of the iMuocent.] 

1 he gentleman elenounces me as having exe- 
cuted an innocent person wiikuut evidence. I 
hare executtd no person, but acted ns the advo- 
cate of the United .States on the trial of persons 
who were charged trilh, and convicted of, the 
asfas<ination of Abraham Lincoln. The gen- 
tleman pronounces, with the assurance of Sir 
Oracle, that an i' nocent woman was on that 
trial convicted without sufficient evidence. Bj 
what right does the gentleman thus assail me, 
or the tribunals of true and brave, and honora- 
ble men, who found the fads upon their oalhi, 
and pTonounced the judgment. What does the 
gentleman know of the evidence in the case, a/id 
what does he care for the evidence when he tf,>ts 
assails the rfficial conduct of thois men a--ho 
constituted the Court. 



^D*oes the gentleman mean to say, by h\i 
sweepiTigjudgment, that it is also upon the 
hands of these brave men who were consti- 
tuted, by the order of your President, a Court 
to pronounce that final judgment without 
whkh- nobody would have been executed? 



Sir, I leave it in Uw language of a man, 
tlj-* latchet of whoi^o shoes tlie gentleman 
would be unlit to unloose — a man who knew 
what was'the rule that sought to govern 
tJi:* :onduct of a judge, and who said that 
k^ would first patiently hear and consider, 
aiii afterwards pronounce judgment. 



•In the language of the great Lord Chancel- 
lor of England, notwitlistanding the ntter- 
auces of the cynical poet that he was the 
gr'^ateat, meanest of mankind — a man who, 
t>) u^e his own words, was touched with an 
iuaer sense aad knowledge of the Deity, 
I am not ashamed to say, in answer to the 
gentleman's accusation. Whether the 
blood of innocence is on my hands or not, 
T leave to the charitable spetchea of men 
&!id to future ages. For, sir, that great 
tiiie<tion, as counected witli the assassina- 
tion of the chosen of tlie people, bj' which 
li^j was cut down in the presence of his re- 
jiHcing Countrymen, not for his crimes but 
for his virtues, murmuring, as his great 
aoul went up to the common Father of us 
al!, '"Charity towards all and malice to- 
wards none," it was fixed that the means 
b/ which his taking ofi' was accomplished 
should be ascertained and determined, 
v> hen summoned to that duty, I protested 
thit I was not equal to the task, and those 
who called me to the work know best with 
w^at reluctance I entered upon it. But, sir, 
with my own present conviction upon the 
r^joord that has gone out to the world, I 
(l«^'> tb.9 gentleman's calumny. 



Does the gentleman [m.-an to say by his 
sweeping] hope to coridemn me Jot the judg- 
ment, [that it is also upon the hands of 
these] that was pronounced hi/ the. nine hrave 
men who were constituted, by the order of 
your President, a Court to [pronounce that 
final judgment without which nobody would 
have been executed] hear and determine that 
issue of life and death upon their oaths accor- 
ding to the evidence. He cannot, sir, condemn 
me for the act of others whatever he may en- 
deavor. Malice itself sir, cannot hold me to 
answer for the judgment of others, ft is du" to 
justice to say that the judgment of that honor- 
able Court is not ivithotit testimony to sustain 
it. 

[Sir, I leave it in the language of a man] 
Sir, I leave this accusation by saying to the 
gentleman in the words of a man xcho, (hough 
pronouiicrd by a cynical poet the greatest, 
rcisest, meaHcst of manJcind — teas a man, the 
latchet of whose shoes the gentleman would 
be unfit to unloose, that it is the duly of a 
good jvdge to hear patiently and be truly im- 
partial. The gentleman constitutes himself my 
judge u-ithout right, and [a man who knew 
what was the rule that ought to govern the 
conduct of a judge, and who said that he 
would first patiently hear and consider, and 
afterwards] pronounces judgment against me 
ivithoni a hearing. 

[In the language of the great Lord Chan- 
cellor of England, notwithstanding the ut- 
terances of the cynical poet that he wa.s the 
greatest, meani'st of mankind — a man who, 
to iise his own words, was touched with an 
inner sei se and knowledge of the Deity, 
I am not asliamed to say, in answer to the 
g.'Htleman'd accusation. Whether the 
blood of innocence is on my hands or not, 
I leave to the cdiaritable speeches of men 
and to future ages. For, sir, that great 
question, as connected with.] 

As the gentleman thus seeks to condemn me 
unheard, and vithout warrant of law or color 
of justice, in his high position as a Stales- 
man, I would nmind him of another utter- 
ance of the High Chancellor of England, thai 
'^Statesmen of greatest depths and comjia.^s 
hare been touched with an inivard sense and 
knowledge of Deity.'' Let those who have 
witnessed the gentleman's bearing in this con- 
' troversy towards me, and who have heard his 
rude and unwarranted judgment upon my offi- 
cial conduct here and cls'.where, decide whether 
' he, has exhibited the character of a good judge, 
n great Statesman, or a gross voluntary calum- 
niator. Whether, in the discharge of the deli- 
i cate trust committed to nie on the liiat of those 
convicttd of assassination, I condemned and 
executed the innocent with or without evidence, 
Heave to the charitable speeches and just hidg- 
moit of men and the recorded farts if history. 

While I offer no apology for my official con- 
duct on thqt trial, I beg leave to say that it 
teas fit that the assassination of the chosen 
of the people, [by which he waj cut down] 
in the Capital of 'the people, and jelt in the 
presence of [his rejoicing Countrymen,] 



t 



their laws, not for his orinif .- but for his vit- 
tues, should be invpxlujatfxl, and that swifi 
judgmerit should full upon those (ftiiltt/ of his 
muider, and w/(o[.*e hands] would not spart' his 
I life, even at the moment trhen, from [whose] 
his great soul, the ivords ifcnt up to our common 
Father, " Charitif toward all and malice 
toward none,'''' [murmuring, as his great 
soul went up to the comiuon Father of us 
all, " Charity toward all and malice toward 
none," it was fixed that the means by which 
his taking off was accomplished should lj« 
ascertained and determined.] When smn- 
mont-d to that sttrn duty, I pTOtest-ed that I 
was not equal to the task, and those who 
s'.imm'ined [called] me to its discharge [tht- 
work. with my own present convictions] 
know liest with what reluctance I entered 
•upon it. But, sir. upon the record that has 
Ifpn made I sfaud and [gone out to the world 
1] defv the gentleman's calumny. 



On Tuesday, March 2t), Mr. Butler Iiavin^/ caused die roreijoing expo.^ 
of Mr. BiNGHAAt'.S speerJi to he distributed lo the House, hn unaidrfions 
consent, rnade lite folio icinrj explanation : 



Mr. BUTLER. I ask leave to make a 
personal explanation, wliich will occupy 
thp attention of the House but a few mo- 
ments. 

Mr. R05S. I would ask how much time 
the gentleman wants ? 

Mr. BUTLER. Fifteen minutes will do. 

Ko objection was made, and leave was 
accordingly granted. 

Mr. BUTLER. Mr. SjH'aker, I have 
caused to be laid upon the table of each 
member a copy, as r^-ported in the otlicial 
journal of the House, of the speech of the 
gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Bixgham,] the 
other day in reply to me. I desire to (^all 
the attention of the House to the fact that 
that speech as published contains double 
thv- amount of matter which the official re- 
porters furnished ; and also that almost one- 
half of the words contained in the original 
oifuial report are erased. Now, I under- 
stands the rule to be. that in any debate 
p*-rsonal to a member, no suidi change can 
be . made properly without the consent of 
th'^ member to be atiected thereby. But 
what I particularly desire to call the atteu 
tion of the House to is thi.t : that a change 
is made in the report which takes tlie shape 
of a direct attack upon me to which I could 
make no reply. The new matter is as fol- 
lows. 

•• The gentleman denounces mo as ha\vin^ t-xocuicd 
an innocent person wittmut evidence. I hare exe- 
cuted no person, but acted as llie advocate of the 
l'i\ited States on the trial r.f persons wlio were charged 
with, and convicted of, the aJi^asjiinHtiun of Abraham 
MiKoln. The gentleman pronounces, with the as-iur- 
ancs of Sir Oracle, that an innocent woman was on 
that trial convicted without suftirient evidence. By 
what right does the gentleman tlm.s assail me, or the 
tr'b'.iai»l3 of true and brave and honorable m-ja, who 
found the facts upon their oaths and pronoanwJ tlie 



judgment? What does the Rcntlem in know of tlie 
ewidonce in the case, and 7.'liat does he care for the 
evidence when he thus assails the oftieial coiidviot of 
those men who constituted the court ': '■ 

Now, with the leave of the House, I do 
not desire to make any characterization by 
use of epithets of such a change. That even 

1 in the heat and ardor of debate we may 

I throw off expressions which upon rejection 

; we would a little rather liad not been said, 
it is most true, may be, and should 1>e 
changed in the official report. I may do so 
myself. But he who, in the cool hour ot 
the silent night, sits down and deliberately 
pens an accusation against his peer to which 
h(! cannot reply is not to be envied. 

Therefore I ask leave now to state the 

I evidence upon which I made the a? sertion I 
did the other day, that Mrs. Surratt was 
improperly convicted ; because the gentle- 

: man says that I neither knew nor cared for 
the evidence. I hold in my hand the evi- 

' dence as reported under the gentleman's 
ofli'.ial sanction. I examined it with great 
care long ago. The statement I made the 

^ oth'T day was not. sporadic thought with 
me ; it was the ) csult of a careful exauinu- 
tion of this case for another and a different 
purpose, in the endeavor to ascertain who 
was concerned in fact in the great conspira- 
cy to assassinate President Lincoln. 

I The gentleman says he was " the advocat'- 
of the United States only." Sir, he makes 
a wide mistake as to his official position. 

; He was the special judge advocate whose 

: duty it was to protect the rights of the pris- 
oner as well as the rights of the Uait«d 
States, and to sum up the evidence and 

; state the law as would a judge on the beuoh. 

i Certainly it was his duty to present to the 



comuiission all the evidenue beariug upon 
the ease. 

Now, there was apiece of evidence within 
the knowledge of the special judge advo- 
cate, and in his possession, which he did 
not produce on this most momentous trial. 
When Hooth was captured by the force 
under Lieutenant < oloiiel Conger tliere was 
taken from his pocket a diary like the one 
I now hold in my hand. In this diary 
Booth had set down, day by day, his plans, 
his thoughts, his motives, and the execu- 
tion of his plans. That diary came into the 
possession of the Government, but it was 
not brought before the military commission. 
Although even Bootli's tobacjo-piipe, spur, 
and compass, found in tlie same pocket 
with the diary, were put in evidence, the 
diary w;is not produced. The diary has 
been befoie your Committee on the Judici- 
ary. Let me say here, to exclude conclu- 
sions, that I do not obtain my evidence 
from them. Tiiat diary, as now produced, 
has eighteen pages cut out, the pages prior 
to the" time when Abiaham Lincoln was 
massacred, although the edges as yet show 
they had all been written over. Now, what 
I want to know is this : was that diary 
whole when it came into the hands of the 
fiovernment ? And second, if it was goo'd 
judgment on the part of the gentleman 
prosecuting the assassins of the Pre-ident 
to put in evidence the tobacco-pipe which 
was found in Booth's pocket, why was not 
tlie diary, in his own liandwriting, put in 
''vidence, and wherein he himself had de- 
tailed the particulars of that crime ? 

And therefore I did not charge the able 
and gallant soldiers who set on that court 
with having done any wrong. They did 
not see the diary. They did not know of 
the diary. If they had they might liavc 
given a diifcrcnt linding ujjon the matter of 
this great conspiracy. 

Who >poliati'<l that book ? Wlio sup- 
pressed that evidence? Wlio caused an 
innocent woman to be hung when he had 
in his pocket a diary which had stated at 
least what was the idea and the purpose of 
the main conspirator in the cas'- ? There is 
still remaining in that diary a mo>t remai k- 
able sentence, written apparently but a few 
hours before Booth died. I give it from 
momory : 

'• I have i.Tideavored to cios.-* the rotomac five timt-s, 
but faikd. I propose to return to WHsliinnton and 
[jive myself up, and clear ni^.-'elf from this great 
orirae." 

How clear himself? By disclosing his 
accomplices ? Who were they ? Who spoli- 
ated that book after it got into the posses- 
sion of the Government, if it was not spoli- 
ated b<ifore ? And what evidence is there 
that it was spoliated before ? 

Why was not Lieutenant Colonel Conger 
alliiwed to state fully in regaid to this mat- 
ter ? Let me read from the reported evi- 
dence on the trial. It will be seen that the 
iiuestions were carefully put, so that Conger 



when on the wituess-staud should not tell 
about that book. He says : 

" I tlieu took what things were in his pocket? apd 
tied them up in ;i piece of pajier. He was not then 
quite dend. He would — mice perhaiig in five iMinutts 
— jjasp; Ilia heart would almost die out, and then it 
Would commence again, and by a few rapid b*ats 
would make a slight motion. 1 left the body and t!;e 
prisoner Herold in charge of Lieutenant Baker. I 
told him to wait an l)Our if 15ooth was not dead: if he 
recovered to wait there, and send over to Belk' I'lain 
for a surgeon from oue of the gunships, and if he 
died in the space of an hour to get the btst convey- 
ance he could and bring him on. 

■' I stayed there some ten minutes after that was 
said when the doctor there said he was dead, 

" [ A knife, pair of pistols, belt, holster, file, pocket- 
compass, spur, pipe, carbine, oartridges, and bills of 
exchange were shown to the witn.ss ] 

'• Tl at is the knife, belt, and holster taken fiom 
Bootli ; the pistols I did not examine with any care ; 
hut they lookM like these; that Is the pocket it mpass. 
jvith tlie c.indle-grease on it ; just as we found it ; the 
-pur I turned over to Mr. Stanton ; and I judge fliis 
to be the one tiiken from Booth. That is the carbine 
we took: it is a Spencer rille, and has a mark ou '.he 
hreech by which I koow it; both pistols aod carbii.e 
were loaded ; I unloaded thecarbiiie myself in .Mr Se- 
cretary Stanton's oflice, and these are the cartridfies 
t>iat 1 took out ; there wa," one in ti e barrel Hn<i I'.e 
chamlier was full i lhe.se are the bills ofexcliani,''. I 
I>ut my initials on them." 

****** 

" I had seen .John Wilkes Hooth in \Vashiiii:toii. 
aii<l lecogniz'd tin- man who waj kill!.d as the saiiu- ; 
I liad before rcmaikt d his restuiblance to his b.oti tr, 
Edwin Boolh, whom I had often seen play." 

It will be seen that there was no point 
where the witness was asked,'* Were these 
things all that you took from BootU'.s 
pockets ?" Certain articles were sprii;:d 
out before the witues, even to a tobacco- 
pipe, and he was asked, "Did you tak-^ 
this ?" " Did you take that?" He answer- 
ed, "Yes." But if tlie proper question 
had been asked he would have answered, 
"Yes ; and I took the diary of Hootli from 
his person ; it was not necessary that I should 
know anything about him from his resem- 
blance to liis brother, Kdwin Booth, in ord^-r 
to recognize liim, because I took this diaiy 
in his own handwriting from his own breas' as 
he lay there gasping 'n tlie agonies of de;i!h.' 
That would have l>eeu an identification be- 
yond all question and all j eradventure. 

Now, sir, I do not know what would have 
bi en the judgment of that military comn.is- 
sion if that evidouce found upon the per- 
son of the piisoner had been proiluced : f,r,d 
that evidence ought, in my judgment, :o 
have been produced. I will state here (t-e- 
canse I wish to deal fairly and justly with 
this case ; I iiave no feeling, no heat in i e- 
gard to it^ that 1 uiider.stind the theory to 
be tliat that evidence was not piodur.d 
le.^t Booth's glorification of Ijimself, ag 
found in liis diary, should go before the 
country. 1 think that a lame exc;use. If 
an assa.-sin can glorify himself, let him do 
so. No harm couM nsult from it in the 
minds of a patriotic and intelligent people- 
Therefore, I again ask, Wliy was a most, re- 
markable piece of cvidtince, which wa.s 
found on the body of the great conspirator, 
concealed f No, I will take that ba<k ; I 
will not say " concealed ; " but why was it 
not brought forward on that trial ? Why 



9 



was it not brouglit to. the knowledge of the 
public miud ? 1 believe that pieoe of evi- 
dence would have shown what the whole 
case, in my judgment, now shows : that up 
to a certain hour Booth contemplated cap- 
ture and abduction, and that he afterward 
changed his purp se to assassination on 
consultation with the conspirators about 
him. 

Mrs. Surrattmay or may not have known 
of that change of purpose from abdiiction 
to assassination. Now, what I find fault with 
in the special judge' advocate, who did not 
sum up for the prisoners, is that in his very 
able and very bitter argument against the 
prisoners, no notice is taken by the special 
judge advocate of this change of purpose 
and brought to the attention of the men 
wha composed that military tribunal. And 
if Mrs. Surratt did not know of this change 
of purpose there is no evidence that she 
knew in any way of the assassination, and 
ought not, in my judgment, to have been 
convicted of taking part in it. 

Mr. Speaker, these are briefly some of the 
reasons why in my former remarks I said 
" I am glad the blood of that woman, be she 
guilty or innocent, is not upon my head." 
But in no manner, in no way, by no intend- 
ment or word of mine, did I mean to say 
that those able and discreet officers, niili- 

lllry luru Wllu lollv.a I'oir tilt. la..tv of tlit. o-icjp 

upon the Special .Judge Advocate, and who 
thought they had all the facts which could 
throw light upon the case, but before whom 
all the facts were not put, did any wrong 
whatever — I do not mean to say they judged 
wrougly under the lights they had. But 
the point I make, and the point which shall 
stand made before this country, is that all 
the testimony possible to throw light on 
that case was not before that tribunal ; for 
if we had only the advantage of all the tes- 
timony, Mr. Speaker, we might then have 
been able, with the testimony of witnesses 
fresh in mind, to find who, indeed, were all 
the accomplices of Booth ; to find who it 
was that cliauged Booth's purpose from 
capture to assassination ; who it was that 
could profit by assassination who could not 
profit by capture and abduction of the Presi- 



dent ; who it was expected by Booth would 
succeed to Lincoln if the knife made a 
vacancy, which we cannot do now but might 
have done if we could ascertain what was 
in that book. Although in some aspects of 
the case it might not have been legal evi- 
dence, yet in all aspects it is moral evidence, 
carrying conviction to the moral sense. It 
is the dying declaration of a man, assassin 
though he be, who was speaking the truth, 
probably to himself, as between himself 
and his God. 

If we had all the pages we should have 
had some explanation of this great fact : 
how was Booth to clear himself, by going 
back to Washington, from the great crime 
he had committed ? That Booth thought he 
oould do so appears from -^ hat still remains ; 
the other eighteen pages are gone. Were 
they gone when the book came into the pos- 
session ofthe learned judge advocate ? Iftliey 
were, why did he not inquire when and 
wliere they went '! When Lieutenant Colo- 
nel Conger gave it to some one, why did he 
not inquire ''Was it whole then .'"' When 
it went into the hinds of the next man was 
it whole then ? Whose was the knife that 
cut the leaves in a way that is plain to be 
seen of all men. 

I am not now speaking of anything which 
is mere hearsey, but of that wliich I know. 
I am speaking of that in which, if I speak 
wrongly, any geulleman of the Judiciary 
Committee who has had this book before him 
can correct me. Again, I take leave to say 
I am not speaking of any knowledge got 
from them, because they properly keep it to 
themselves. 

Now, sir, I should not have farther pur- 
sued this matter except that the gentleman 
charged me with haviug made luy statement 
withont evidence — without examination of 
the evidence. He has chosen to bring this 
matter here by that charge, and I desire now 
in Kome form this matter shall be fully 
and thorouglily investigated, so that all the 
facts may be brought before the House and 
the country. 

The speaker. The gentleman's time 
has expired. 



Mr. Clarke, of Kansas, on the 29^/i of March, having introduced a Resola- 
Hon ordering the Committee on the Judiciary to report upon the subject 
of lmp)eachmtnt, Mr. BuTLER spoke as follows, in the time allotted 
him : 



Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas. I jield fifteen 
minutes to the gentleman from Massachu- 
setts. 

Mr. BUTLKR. Allow me to say that I 
had no knowledge^? this resolution uutil 
it Avas read to the House. I have examined 
it, and I desire to say a few words in its 
behalf. In reply to the gentleman from 
Kew York, [Mr. Wood,] who says this is 
an absurd and uujust agitation of the ques- 
tion of impeachment, having had sometiiing 
to do with tliat agitation, I suppose I may 
without offence state some of the grounds 
upon which I have acted. 

In the first place, as to what has been 
done by the committee. No man has a 
right to know what they know. It is enough 
that they liave said solemnly that there is 
sufficient ground to continue the invpctipa 
tion, and that they have not completed it. 
That being so, no man has a right to say 
that they have found nothing. They have 
found sometiiing by which they feel them- 
selves called upon to continue their search 
into the acts of the President. 

The absurdity of this agitation, as it is 
called, may be seen in the fact that the 
Legislatures of two States have by solemn 
vote called upon Congress to investigate for 
the impeachment of the President. The 
necessity of the proceeding is sustained by 
the fact that petition after petition has been 
submitted uuder the rule and referred to 
that committee. It is seen in the fact that 
the country has no longer any confidence 
in the Executive. In my judgment the 
Constitution meant to provide that when 
the country, by an almost universal voice, 
expresses its loss of confidence in the Ex- 
ecutive, the time has then come for Congress 
to declare that the occupant of the presi- 
dential chair, which he no longer fills, but 
obstructs, should be removed. 

The gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Wood] says that such a precedent will put 
the Executive at the mercy of Congress. 
Well, who compose the Congress ? Con- 
gress are the representatives of the people, 
fresh from them, speaking their will, echo- 
ing their thoughts, and enacting their high 
behests. It is for them to bring to the 
Senate, representing the organization of 
States, the charges against the high ofiicer 
who has so offended against the people's 
will under the Constitution. And it is for 



that Senate, on their solemn oaths, to judge 
upon the state of facts thus presentt^d. I 
hold and shall — I may say that the country 
holds — that every ofiicer ouglit to continue 
in "oflice upou that tenure alone, except 
possibly judges, who are the only excep- 
tions, that they are removable by the rep- 
resentatives of the people upon such mis- 
behavior in office as the people shall deem 
sufficient. 

Now, with the full sense of all the re- 
sponsibilities that are upon me, knowing 
that I speak in the face of the nation, I can 
inform the gentleman from New York of one 
piece of testimony tliat "can be brought on 
oath before the Committee of the Judiciary. 
I do not say it has yet been brought before 
them ; but I say there is a piece of testi- 
mony mat can bo produced showing a gross 
abuse of the pardoning power by the Presi- 
dent. A claim agent in West Virginia last 
year conceived the idea of having a large 
number of deserters from the Army of the 
United States pardoned, in order that he 
might obtain large gains from pressing their 
claims for their forfeited bounties and pay 
b(?forethe War Department. He took from 
the returns of the adjudant general of that 
State a list of one hundred and ninet}'- three 
deserters, forty only of whom he knew any- 
thing about ; all the rest were unknown to 
him, except that they stood upon the rolls 
marked "deserters." He weat to the 
Democratic candidate in one of the congres- 
sional districts of West Virginia 

Mr. WOOD. Will the gentleman allow 
me to ask him a question ? 

Mr. BUTLER. Certainly. 

Mr. WOOD, I desire to ask the gentle- 
man, while he is so ready to produce evi- 
dence to show an abuse of the pardoning 
power, which he deems a sufficient cause 
for impeachment, why does he not add to 
that an expose of the lost leaves of Booth's 
diary ? 

Mr. BUTLER. I do not fully hear the 
question of the gentleman. 

Mr. WOOD. I ask the gentleman why he 
does not submit to the country, and es- 
pecially to the Committee on the .Judiciary, 
the very important testimony which was 
lost when the leaves were torn out of 
Booth's diary ? I think from the intima- 
tions of the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Butlek] iu reference to that subject, 



11 



some one, whether in this Honse or at the ! 
other eud of the avenue I will not say, has } 
been gnilty of an outrage of much greater 1 
magnitude than an abuse of the X-i^rdou- i 
ing power. 

Mr. BUTLER. I will endeavor to answer 
the gentleman if I have time. Let me 
finish the statement I wa.3 making-. 

This claim agent in West Virginia called 
■upon the Democratic candidate to state that 
if he could get these one liundred and nine- ; 
ty-three men pardoned they would vote the i 
IJemocratic ticket in the last election, and 
as the district was likely to be close, their \ 
votes would probably elect him. There- i 
upon the candidate wrote a letter to the 
President of the United States, which letter 
was peHt to him. 

?ir. ELDRIDGE. I rise to a question of 
order. The point of order which I wish to 
state is this : the gentleman now occupying 
tlie Speaker's chair [Mr. Boutwell] is 
aware of the. fact that the gentleman Irom 
Massachusetts [Mr. Bdtlek] has been per- 
mitted to come before the Committee on 
the Judiciary and examine a witness. The 
Chair is also aware that the injunction of 
secrecy has been imposed upon that com- 
mittee. Now, I insist that, having been 
admitted before them by the courte.^y of 
tke oomniittee, the gentleman from P»lassa- 
chusetts [Mr. Butler] has no right to com- 
ment upon the facts he is now giving to the 
House ; he has no right to disclose any fact 
or statement which occurred before that 
committee. 

Mr. BUTLER. I do not. 
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair 
cannot sustain the point of order raised by 
the gentleman from Wisconsin, [Mr. Eld- 
EiDGE,] because the House has taken no ac- 
tion in that respect upon the proceedings 
before the committee. 

Mr. BUTLER. I am careful not to state 
anything as having taken place before the 
Committee on the Judiciary. What lam now 
stating I know outside of the committee. 
But if the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Eldkidge] chooses to tell the House that 
any stich testimony as I am stating has 
been taken by the Committee on the Judi- 
ciary, it is he and not I who is making the 
revelation of what was done in committee. 
Mr. ELDRIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I insist 
that I have not disclosed anything that oc- 
curred before the committee ; bttt I have 
raised the question of order that the gentle- 
man from Massachttsetts, having been before 
the committee, andhavinghad the privilege 
of exaiiiining witnesses [Mr. Butlek. A 
witness] has no right to state the facts 
which appeared before the committee. Does 
the gentleman allege that these facts which 
he is stating did not come to his knowledge 
br-fore the committee ? 

Mr. BUTLER. I say to the gentleman 
from Wisconsin^ that these facts came to 
my knowledge before I was ever in the 



room of the .Judiciary Committee, or else 
perhaps he never would have known any- 
thing about them till he hears the state- 
ment to the House the present time. He is 
the man who discloses what has been done 
in the Judiciary Committee when he says 
that I was before it. I have not said any 
word of what was done before the commit- 
tee. The gentleman must keep the secrets 
of his own committee ; 1 will not disclose 
them. 

Now, I say again that that letter was sent 
to the President of the United States, say- 
ing that the district was close, and that if 
these men were pardoned they would vote 
the Democratic ticket and thus carry the 
district. With it wa? ""^nt a copy of the 
li^ of deserters to the I'resident of the 
United States, and thereupon every one of 
these one hundied and ninety-tliree-meu 
was restored to the roll and thus entitled to 
claim his pay and allowances, which he 
had forfeited by desertion ; and the pay and 
allowances, in the judgment of those who 
have investigated the subject, esceeA the 
sum of seventy- five thousand dollars. 

Now, sir, I will explain to the House how 
I came to know anything aboitt this matter ; 
for, sir, I am no volunteer. The House did 
not seem to desire nae to take any part in 
developing the evidence bearing on this im- 
peachment, ana I liave so rat let, tlio Mouse 
and its committee take care of itself in that 
regard. But, sir, I liappen to be a member 
of the board of n anagers of the National 
Asvluni for Disabled Sold'ers ; by the choice 
of my fellow-managers, I am president of 
that board. The fund which Congress has 
appropriated to the sttpport of our disabled 
soldiers in that institution consists of the 
fines and forfeitures sufleied by deserters ; 
and when I was looking after that fund, as 
was my duly to do, I found that without 
evidence to sustain him, without examina- 
tion, the President of the United States, for 
political reasons, had taken $75,000 of that 
fund which the managers of this institution, 
of which he was one ex officio, were to ad- 
minister for the benefit of the disabled 
heroes of the war, and had lurned it over 
to the deserters from the Array, on the un- 
derstanding only that they should vote the 
Democratic ticket. Learning this fact, sir, 
I felt botind to pursue this investigation ; 
and the testimony which I have now in 
substance given to the House has been 
given upon the oath of a brevet brigadier 
general of the Army of the United States. 

Mr HUBBARD, of West Virginia. Will 
the gentleman from Massachusetts be kind 
enough to tell the House to which district 
of West Virginia his remarks has refereno ? 

Mr. BUTLER. The district represented 
by Mr. Kitchex. Oh, sir, I have no con- 
cealment. 

Mr. HUBBARD, of West Virginia. I only 
want to get at the facts for the benefit of 



12 



history, and more particular of West Vir- 
ginia. [Laughter.] 

Mr. BUTLER. All right, sir ; the gentle- 
man shall have them all. He is welcome 
to anything that I cm do in this regard for 
the benefit of West Virginia or any other 
place. 

Now, sir, let me state one fact further, 
because I have nothing to conceal about 
this matter — I am speaking upon sworn 
testimony; if it is not true, let it be in- 
vestigated. I never brought out any of 
these facts bearing on impeachment except 
when I have been much enforced — 

" Like the flint wliich shows a hasty spark, 
And straight is cold again." 

Mr. WOOD. 'WTthe gentleman permit 
me to ask him whether, according to this 
testimony or within his own knowledge, the 
President had personal cognizance of these 
facts ? 

Mr. BUTLER. I will state what the tes- 
timony is. That list of one hundred and 
niuetf^-three deserters, with no other testi- 
mony but this letter, went to the President 
tliiough the hands of Colonel Thomas B. 
Plorence, who is somewhat known to mem- 
bers of the House ; and the answer that 
came back was a restoration of eVery one 
of the men on that list, without dotting an 
i. OT crossing a t, so far as can be s^f n, ^•".'i 
upon no other testimony than the fa^it that 
they would vote the Democratic ticket ; 
which I suppose would be a good reason for 
restoring all the deserters from the Army, 
thereby entirely absorbing the fund set aside 
for disabled soldiers. 

Mr. WOOD. I submit that the reply of 
the geutUnnan from Massacliusetts virtually 
acquits the President from any complicity 
in this transaction. 

Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas. I yield to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts five minutes 
more. 

Mr. BUTLER. I Want to finish this state- 
ment to the House. My statement does 
not acquit the President because he has no 
right to restore to deserters hundreds and 
thousands of dollars out of the Treastiry 
without some evidence of some deserving 
other than that they will vote for the De- 
mocratic ticket ; and he had no other evi- 
dence in this case. There is where the 
trouble comes in. He received a letter 
from the candidate for Congress, accom- 
panied by a list of deserters, and without 
evidence, without inquiry, without any- 
body's recommendation, without any de- 
serving on their part, be does that act which 
restores them, takes from the 'I'reasury 
$75,000, takes it from the poor maimed 
soldiers, and gives it to those deserters. 

I introduced the name of Colonel Florence 
because it was introduced in the testimony ; 
and I never do anything behind any gentle- 
man's back. The same testimony also 
shows when Mr. Florence brought back this 
list, which was sent to the claim agent in 



the charge of and directed to the care of 
Hon. Thomas B. Florence, that lie was paid 
by this claim agent $1,000 for his serviva 
in that behalf. Is there any other question 
any gentleman would like to ask me ? 
[Laughter.] 

Mr. CHANLER. I ask the gentleman if 
that is the rate at which Democartic voters 
were procured in his experience when he 
was a Democrat ? 

Mr. BUTLER. "Out of the abundance 
of the heart the mouth speaketh." I was 
never a Democrat in the gentleman's State. 
I never knew of any such transaction iu 
my own. 

Mr. GHANLER. I ask the gentlomiu 
to answer, because he seemed to mak • the 
assertion as if this were a Democratic qwes- 
tion. I do not myself wish to be understood 
as in any way believing this lias anything 
to do with the Democratic party. It is a 
transaction in a single district that has 
nothing at all to do with the Democratic 
party. 

Mr. BUTLER. I do not charge the Dem- 
ocratic party with it. I never take notice of 
very small things, and I think the Demo- 
cratic party is too small at present. [Laugh- 
ter.] 1 always like to take a man of my size, 
when I am going strike. [Renewed laugh- 
ter ] 

Mr. CIIANLER. I a.sk the gentlemm if 
he thinks wheu he left the Democratic par- 
ty he reduced it to its present si2e ? 

Mr. BUTLER. The country will judge 
what reiluced it. 

Mr. CHx-iNLER. I am glad to hear that. 

Mr. BUTLER. I cannot continue the col- 
loqtiy with the gentleman, as it is not per- 
tinent to the issue. 

Mr. MARSHALL. I ask the gentleman 
from Kansas to yield to me a few moments. 

Mr. CLARKE, of Kansas. I yield to the 
gentleman for a short time. 

Mr. MARSHALL. I do not knowwhetlier 
I understood the gentleman from Maw.^acbu- 
setts correctly. He speaks of facts which 
have been proven. To what evidence does 
he refer ? 

Mr. BUTLER. An investigation, sir, 
which I instituted for the purpose of seeing 
where the money of the asylum over which 
I presided was going, and which I took care 
should be put in the proper channels. My 
justification is that the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Wood] said this whole agitation 
was absurd and was not based on the slight- 
est evidence. I was driven in self-defence 
to say what I have. I had not said a word 
either about Booth's diary or about this mat- 
ter until somebody wanted to know. Then 
I always answer. 

Mr. MARSHALL. I am not aware that the 
matter of Booth's diary has been up this 
morning. 

Mr. BUTLER. Oh, yes ; it was referred to 
by the gentleman from New York, [Mr. 



' 'I » _ •! » V^ 










^^ ^^.^ 






\ 



■% . 



^'^■ 



"v 






.^■ 




^. ,^ 






>,- V 



-0 1**1, * O 
♦V/7^^?,' ^ 






0^ 



•^^0^ 

.•^o. 







* .4? *^. 



.0* -^o. 



^*" M 






V'^Y'^'" (4 



4" ^.r 






-> 



6 ^^- ' ^■ 



J4. 



,4 c 



♦ » « ' ,^^ 



.^ </» 



^^ ^.-. 






>V7< 



iCJ <a . «<> 



:-^/,. 



VVtRT 

600KB1NCMNC 

Cramville Pa 



''b v' 



-A o. 



.C."^^f». 



^■t 



